U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died

Yes, there are people I think are terrible.

Yes, some of them are people I don't know.

Would I say it on the day their death was announced? Tougher question.

Candidly: if I felt like most of the people calling Scalia a "terrible person" were well acquainted with his work, beyond sound bites like "opposed marriage equality" or "thought we should shoot condemned convicts first and then hear their appeals", I wouldn't chide. But it seems like the more cut-and-dry an opinion you get about Scalia, the less well-informed and helpful it turns out to be.

I usually disagreed with Scalia, but I have tons of respect for the man. He's always struck me as one of the best examples of the idea that two intelligent, educated people with reasonable minds may legitimately come to different conclusions about the same set of facts.

I also found when reading transcripts of oral arguments that Scalia was really terrifically funny pretty often.

Once, I was doing some computer repair work for an attorney who was interviewing Scalia extensively for a book about Supreme Court oral arguments. It was late in the day, and all the other staff were gone.

The phone rang, and the attorney asked me if I would answer it since I was close, and tell whoever it was that he was busy. I picked it up and the voice on the other end said, "let me speak to x." I said he wasn't in. The voice says, "I know he's in. Let me speak to him please." I tried to deflect again, and he finally says, "This is Justice Scalia. I guarantee you your boss wants to talk to me."

Without thinking I piped up and said, "Oh, Justice Scalia! You won't believe who just walked in the door! Just a second."

Apparently Scalia thought that was hilarious and told the guy to pay me extra for popping off to a Supreme Court justice like that.

Edit: as a quick sidenote, I'd encourage everyone to actually read the oral arguments and the full opinions for important cases as they come up. The media is absolutely terrible about over simplifying or just straight up not getting the issues correct.

You will find that there is a hell of a lot of thought that goes into opinions, and there is much less predetermined ideology than the way these things often get painted.

>5. Citizens United was 5-4 with Scalia supporting the decision (this is what created superPACs), so potentially this could result in a limitation of corporate personhood

I think that phrasing is deceptive. The question isn't whether corporations are people with rights, but whether people retain their rights when they coordinate the exercise thereof through a corporation, which includes non-profit groups. It should be a red flag that abolishing that right would abolish the free press without some special exemption. That requires the government to start defining who is press and who is not, which if anything is a quickly fading distinction. The distinction between MSNBC/Fox News and a SuperPAC is not so clear. (Thankfully, we have such an exemption because the first amendment particularly protects the freedom of the press, in addition to the general freedom of speech. There's a lot of examples of redundant provisions in the Constitution, and I think this is one of them. The freedom of the press flows naturally from all of the other freedoms in the Constitution.)

The particular case was actually about a political group that made a film criticizing Hillary back in 2008 during the primary season. The government wanted to ban them from promoting it during the two months leading up to the election. How can anyone think that's proper?

Let's say that you and I shared a passion for a political idea. We want to convince people of it and effect change through the political process. What would we do? We'd set up a non-profit (a corporation), convince donors of our cause, spend their money on pamphlets, broadcast ads, internet ads, discussion forums, etc. We'd support candidates that back our idea, and oppose those who oppose it. That is freedom at work and it's exactly what the Citizens United decision protects.

Senator McConnell has announced that the Senate will not take up a Supreme Court nomination this year. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbIYaMiW4AIU4ZB.jpg

McConnell is a racist and doesn't like Obama.